No. 46, 2014 WAYEB NOTES ISSN 1379-8286 CHALLENGING THE LIGHTNINGS: SAN BARTOLO’S WEST WALL MURAL AND THE MAIZE HERO MYTH H.E.M. Braakhuis Utrecht University Music [...] gives man a grip on nature, which the gods cannot allow - Alain Ichon The iconography of the Tonsured Maize God, an important Classic Mayan deity, is generally assumed to be grounded in mythology. To reconstruct this mythology, recourse has been made to two specific models: the Popol Vuh Twin myth and the Gulf Coast mythology of the maize hero. The first of these identifies the Tonsured Maize God with Hun-Hunahpu, the father of the Twins, while postulating the father’s resurrection. The second, which is of principal concern here, focuses instead on the Tonsured Maize God’s shared and varied associations with the maize god of the Gulf Coast peoples – associations pertaining chiefly to the domains of sustenance, water and rain, the dead, kingship, and such arts as writing, dance, and music (Braakhuis 2009; Chinchilla Mazariegos 2011). Figure 1. San Bartolo ‘Pinturas’ Sub-1A, west wall, central scene of the maize ‘triptych’: Dancing maize deity challenging the pluvial deities (drawing by Heather Hurst) To address the limitations inherent to the first model, notably the tale’s primary focus on the ball game and lack of episodes explicitly linking the paternal figure to the maize, the model has been augmented in two interpretive ways, one naturalistic and the other conceptual. According to the naturalistic interpretation, the Tonsured Maize God is little more than a personification of the plant. His infant form represents the seed, his feather Wayeb Note 46: Challenging the Lightnings H.E.M. Braakhuis adornments are maize leaves, his dance movements express growth, and the emptying of a jar into the cleft from which he emerges signifies watering the maize. More generally, the relevant scenes are seen as expressing the developmental and seasonal stages of the crop. According to the conceptual interpretation, aspects and scenes of the Tonsured Maize God are explained symbolically, with a marked emphasis on broad concepts such as ancestry, kingship, world creation, and the world centre. Thus, the maize deity’s canoe voyage is thought to symbolize the destiny of dead kings; the lightning torch in his forehead, royal ancestry; and his acrobatic stance, the world tree of the centre. Both the naturalistic and the conceptual interpretations have been brought to bear on the mythological scenes that are to be discussed here. The focus of this article is on two crucial motifs of maize deity iconography depicted in the central scene of a triptych on the west wall mural of a Late Pre-Classic temple room at San Bartolo (‘Las Pinturas’ Sub-1A): the turtle cave and the turtle drum. A turtle is shown complete with a clawed foot, but with the shell replaced by a four-lobed, or quadrifoil, window through which the maize deity is seen dancing while beating a turtle drum and, apparently, shaking a rattle (Fig. 1).1 The scene anticipates the Classic turtle carapace emergence of the Tonsured Maize God. The Classic emergence itself has been interpreted naturalistically, namely as the sprouting of the maize plant from the earth following the onset of the rainy season (e.g., Taube 1985: 174-175; Miller and Martin 2004: 57; Zender 2006: 10). By positing an analogy with the Puebloan ‘place of emergence’, both the Classic turtle carapace emergence and the Pre-Classic San Bartolo turtle cave scene have also been explained conceptually, namely as the first emergence of the maize from a cave at the centre of the world (Taube et al. 2010: 74-75, 84 note 8). At the same time, however, a Mesoamerican narrative motif, wherein the Maize Mountain is opened by the deities of rain and lightning, figures within this conceptual interpretation. Because the turtle icon is equated with the Maize Mountain, the maize deity is assumed to be unable to leave his cave before it has been violently opened by the lightning bolts of the pluvial deities. These assumptions are examined below in the context of the Classic carapace emergences themselves. Instead of offering a naturalistic or conceptual interpretation of the turtle of emergence and its maize deity, the present author has identified the central San Bartolo scene as a specific episode from Gulf Coast maize mythology, namely the challenge and self- revelation of the maize hero vis-à-vis the thunder and lightning deities (Braakhuis 2009: 12, 23, 30). In this identification, which appeared before the final publication of the mural, I refrained from discussing the challenge episode at any length. This shortfall is remedied here. Before doing so, however, three issues need to be addressed. First is an interpretive problem posed by the San Bartolo turtle cave icon: The turtle’s widely accepted identification as the earth seems to conflict with a narrative wherein the encounter with the lightning deities is set in an overseas region. Second is the ‘first emergence’ interpretation of the turtle cave scene and the maize deity’s role in that emergence. Third is the question of the central scene’s connection to the flanking scenes. 1 Only the stick of the rattle survives. Elsewhere, an Early Classic Tonsured Maize God is accompanied by an emblem consisting of a pair of rattles (Deletaille Tripod, Hellmuth 1988: Fig. 4.4) - 2 - Wayeb Note 46: Challenging the Lightnings H.E.M. Braakhuis Two views of the turtle carapace It has been noted (Taube et al. 2010: 72-75; cf. Taube 1988: 189-190) that the San Bartolo quadrifoil turtle is a variation on depictions on Pre-Classic monuments from Guatemala’s south coast showing quadrifoil reptiles – a turtle (Izapa stela 8) and a crocodile (Takalik Abaj altar 48)2 – and also on various Classic monuments, all with window-like frames and often a ruler figure inside.3 Elsewhere, the quadrifoil turtle is replaced both by turtle carapaces adorned with the glyph for ‘King’ (Taube 1988: figs. 3b, 4a) and by the better known Classic turtles from which the Tonsured Maize God emerges as a king in his own right. The current interpretation of the turtle carapace as a symbol of the earth floating in the sea (Taube 1986: 57-58; Taube 1988: 193-195) – an ‘earth turtle’ or ‘world turtle’ – is based on scant data. First, Itzimte Altar 1 shows the head of a lightning deity within a turtle carapace aperture bordered by T526 ‘earth’ (kab/kaban) signs; second, a Post- Classic Mayapan stone turtle is fringed with a chain of thirteen Ahaw signs that could signal a geographical projection of the 13 katuns, established in 13 kingdoms, onto a terrestrial surface equated with the back of the carapace. The second piece of evidence is less than convincing, however, both because the turtle is of a different type than the pseudo-bicephalous turtle of emergence, and because the thirteen Ahaw signs may just be another way for marking the turtle as a place associated with the origin of kingship, without the further intention of equating the turtle’s surface with that of the earth. Two additional arguments buttressing the earth hypothesis also warrant review. If the emerging maize deity is viewed as a mere personification of the plant, then it seems inescapable to identify the turtle as the earth. This line of thought is, however, based on the outmoded notion that myth is directly descriptive of nature. Furthermore, whereas an earth turtle would indeed parallel the Aztec concept of the earth as a swordfish or crocodile, such a parallel could well be misleading. In sum, what seems beyond dispute is that in one case, namely Itzimte Altar 1, a turtle inhabited by aquatic deities is connected to the earth, whereas in other cases, this connection remains uncertain. Another way of approaching the turtle icon is to view it first as the homestead of important aquatic and pluvial deities: a rain deity and an aquatic serpent in the case of San Bartolo’s turtle cave, the lightning deity (god K) and the aged thunder god (god N), amongst others, in the case of the Classic turtle carapace. By this view, an identification with the earth is only one among several possibilities. Following Sahagún’s (1979: 700 = Bk XI Ch. 12) description of a subterranean Tlalocan as the mythical source of all terrestrial waters, the turtle’s interior cavity could represent an underground ‘Tlalocan’, which would in turn suggest its lateral apertures to represent passages into the sea (Braakhuis 1990: 132-133). Although this Mayan ‘Tlalocan’ could in principle embrace the entire earth, the turtle icon could also stand for a more restricted ‘Tlalocan’. This concept appears from Gulf Coast descriptions of subterranean lakes and of lagoons as residences of the pluvial deities (see Braakhuis 1990: 133-134). Furthermore, Sahagún’s description directly connects the subterranean Tlalocan to the sea, which is described as penetrating 2 Chinchilla Mazariegos kindly called my attention to the fact that the reptile of the Takalik Abaj altar represents a crocodile or caiman rather than a turtle. 3 Guernsey provides a detailed discussion of the Pre-Classic quadrifoil window, which she characterizes as both “a watery place associated with rain, aqueducts, pools of water, and mists” and a symbol “where the past/otherworld intersected with the present/terrestrial world” (2010: 90). - 3 - Wayeb Note 46: Challenging the Lightnings H.E.M. Braakhuis the earth through all its veins and apertures - a viewpoint widely reported from contemporary central Mexico, as well as from the Gulf Coast area (e.g., Lorente y Fernández 2012: 74; Knab 2004: 97-131; cf. Hooft 2007: 226-227).